Buried this week in the avalanche of details contained in the former FBI director’s memos about his personal meetings with Donald Trump is one line that indicates Comey and his cronies in the highest echelons of American government were setting up Trump for failure from the beginning.

And it’s Comey’s own words that hold the clue.

In an analysis published Friday by The Federalist, senior editor Molly Hemingway points out that one memo in particular indicates Comey and his circle could well have orchestrated one of the most important media leaks of Trump’s presidency.

In the memo, Comey recounted a Jan. 6, 2017 meeting with Trump in which he warns the then-president-elect that many media outlets were aware of the existence of the so-called “Trump dossier,” with its allegations of corruption and tawdry tales of Trump’s alleged romps with Russian prostitutes.

“I said media like CNN had them and were looking for a news hook,” he wrote.

Talk about a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Not a week passed before CNN — the very news outlet Comey cautioned about – was using the very meeting Comey attended with the incoming president to blare the scurrilous allegations contained in the dossier even before Trump put his hand on the Bible for the oath of office.

“Classified documents presented last week to President Obama and President-elect Trump included allegations that Russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and financial information about Mr. Trump, multiple US officials with direct knowledge of the briefings tell CNN.” (Emphasis added.)

OK, allowing Comey the benefit of the doubt that he didn’t pick up the phone and call CNN about his own meeting with Trump (there’s really no reason to give him that benefit, but being charitable never hurts), the memo Comey wrote was dated Jan. 7, 2017.

It was written to Comey’s Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, then-FBI General Counsel James Baker, and Comey’s Chief of Staff James Rybicki.

Any one of those men — particularly McCabe, whose penchant for leaking cost him his FBI pension — could well have been the source for CNN’s report.

Hemingway suggests another potential source, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who Comey wrote originally suggested his meeting with Trump. This might come as a shock, but Clapper is now a national security analyst for none other than CNN.

But there were others, too. According to The Daily Caller, officials who knew about the meeting and could have leaked it to CNN are then-CIA Director John Brennan — a known leaker, a vociferous Trump critic and...

The union that represents the deputies who responded to the Florida high school massacre is holding a no-confidence vote on the sheriff, with the labor group's leaders saying he should have accepted some blame for the shooting.

The Broward Sheriff's Office Deputies Association is conducting a poll of its members about their confidence in Sheriff Scott Israel, who strongly denounced the vote as a union tactic to get pay raises. The electronic poll ends Thursday night.

President Jeff Bell said Friday that Israel's handling of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting that killed 14 students and three staff members is a major component of the no-confidence campaign, saying he should not have put the full blame on Deputy Scot Peterson, the school's resource officer.

Video shows Peterson remained outside after investigators say former student Nikolas Cruz opened fire Feb. 14 inside the three-story freshman building with an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle. Israel said shortly after the shooting that Peterson should have rushed into the building to confront and kill Cruz. Peterson retired rather than accept an unpaid suspension.

Bell also has criticized Peterson, but said Israel should not have publicly singled the deputy and should have placed him on paid leave until an investigation into his conduct was completed. He said only deputies accused of crimes are placed on unpaid leave and Peterson has never been charged.

Israel issued a statement Friday saying it is "unfortunate and appalling" that Bell is using the school shooting "as a bargaining tactic to extort a 6.5 percent pay raise" for the union's members. The 3-year-old union represents the ...

Imagine how much money the richest person in history would have. Now add a couple hundred billion, and you’ve probably gotten closer to how much wealth Mansa Musa had circa 1324 A.D.

Economists have determined that the West African emperor’s vast wealth most likely positions him as the richest person in history. But just how much money did he have? And what did he do with it?

Mansa Musa’s Start

Emperor Mansa Musa I came to reign over the Malian Empire through somewhat strange means.

Before embarking on a long and somewhat arduous pilgrimage to Mecca (called a Hajj in the Muslim religion), then-emperor Abubakari II deputized Musa to temporarily assume his role. An “on-call” emperor was a common feature throughout the history of the empire. It’s somewhat comparable to the modern-day role of a vice president.

This arrangement worked out fine until Abubakari set out to explore the far side of the Atlantic Ocean and never returned. Musa, then, inherited the throne since he had been deputized. But Musa wasn’t a nobody: His great-uncle was Sundiata Keita, who founded the Malian Empire.

As many a late night infomercial will tell you, there are lots of ways to attain wealth. Musa got his primarily through trading gold and salt, which were found in abundance in West Africa at the time. He also used the money to strengthen the country’s cultural centers, particularly Timbuktu, which he annexed in 1324.

It was when Musa made his Hajj to Mecca — an important part of the Muslim religion, which was very widespread in the region at this point in history — that the rest of the world became aware of the extent of his wealth.

Because he had so much to spend, his caravan throughout Cairo, Medina, and finally to Mecca had a procession of more than 60,000, including 12,000 slaves, dozens of animals, and plenty of gold. In fact, as they traveled, Musa and his entourage gave gold away to people in the streets.

They also bought lots of stuff — so much stuff, in fact, that they actually messed up the global economy for a while: The gold he spent circulated, and there was so much of it, that the value actually went down.

The disruption eventually evened out, in part because Mansa Musa began borrowing from lenders in Cairo (despite the high interest rate) and essentially single-handedly controlled the price of gold in the Mediterranean.

The Lasting Contributions Of Mansa Musa’s Wealth

So what did Mansa Musa do with all the money, aside from giving away bricks to random people in the street and using it to buy souvenirs?

He actually ended up using most of it to build a great number of mosques (legend says he built one every Friday of his reign), the most famous of which is the Djinguereber Mosque. He also commissioned many universities throughout the kingdom — many of which, along with the mosques, are still standing today, some 700 years later.

Musa quite literally put himself, and his empire, on the map when he made this journey — maps from Italian cartographers during his reign had artists add his likeness, holding a nugget of gold of course. He extended the reach of his trade ports and became one of the most powerful rulers of his time — if not in all of history.

Musa ruled for about 25 years according to historian’s best estimates: they believe he died in 1332, at which time his son inherited the throne.

In the spirit of other extremely wealthy people who ultimately become philanthropists, you might wonder how he stacks up against some contemporary billionaires, like Bill Gates, John D. Rockefeller, or Warren Buffett.

When adjusted for inflation, Mansa Musa’s wealth is believed to have been around $400 billion. The only person who comes close to Musa’s wealth is John D. Rockefeller, whom economists believe amassed a worth of around...

The antebellum South saw a great rise in the agriculture industry. This profitable commerce needed a labor force for working the fields, cooking and serving the meals, and for general labor. Slaves from Africa bore most of the burden, but slaves from countries like Ireland were also used. Irish slaves came to America and the West Indies as early as 1625 when James II sold 30,000 Irish prisoners as slaves to the New World. It is estimated that approximately 100,000 Irish men, women, and children were transported to the colonies as slaves.

Not to be called racist, Britain, in the 17th and 18th centuries, was an equal opportunity exploiter of human flesh, having sold over 600,000 Irish, Scottish, and Catholics into slavery. In early America, slavery was not a race issue, it was primarily a financial one. It was not until well into the 19th century, when the fusion of race, slavery, politics, and with the beginning of the ascension of the former white slaves, that people of African origin began to be known as Negros.

Slavery in America was not unique to this continent. It was almost universal at the time and goes as far back as 3,500 B.C. It was a way to get a cheap and plentiful labor force. It is only in recent human history that slavery has become totally illegal, at least on the books.

While liberals like to castigate Americans as inventing racism and human servitude, they fail to mention that slavery in early America is not American history at all, it is English history. Before 1776, there was no United States or United States law. It was a British colony under British law. In 1772, the Emancipation Act freed slaves in England, but with no thanks to Britain, it did not include its colonies.

The United States began with the idea that slavery would soon have to end. Ben Franklin was active in the Pennsylvania Society for the Abolition of Slavery and became its president in 1787. It was relatively early in the history of the United States that slavery was made illegal, and enforced in blood.

Today, the aristocrats of industry, the rich Hollywood types, the technocrats of Silicon Valley, demand the same advantages as the plantation owners of the 19th century…inexpensive labor…labor to work the fields, toil in their factories, clean their mansions, cut their lawns, cook their meals, or even fill their date books. These same people that donate millions to political parties expect something in return. For many, it is an open border…a plentiful supply of inexpensive labor.

For many Republicans, labor costs have been cut to the bone, or as President Bush said, “They do what Americans won’t do.” What he means is, Americans can’t live on those wages, but illegal immigrants can and will.

Democrats also want the cheap labor, but they are smart enough to see a new voting bloc in their future should they be successful in getting amnesty passed. If you can’t convince voters, get new ones.

Since the middle class has largely left the Democrat Party, new voters are needed to fill in the gaps. Locking in voting blocs is nothing unusual for the Democrats, after all, it was LBJ that used his ‘Great Society Program’ to lock in Black votes. According to...

WEYMOUTH, MA (Fox News) – An Uber driver charged with raping a passenger earlier this month was able to walk free because officials failed to notify immigration agents about his arrest, authorities said.

Frederick Amfo, 30, an illegal immigrant from Ghana, was arrested after a female passenger said that on April 8 he forced her into the backseat of his car and raped her, police said. Hours after he was released from police custody, he fled to his native Ghana. He was supposed to surrender his passport but did not.

“A loss for words,” Emily Murray, the victim who insisted on being identified by the press, told Boston 25. “I was angry, I’m still angry. I’m confused.”

A spokesman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement told Boston 25 that a federal immigration detainer should have been placed on Amfo. Weymouth police claimed it forwarded the detainer to Quincy District Court.

“The court chose not to forward the detainer to Norfolk County, allowing for his subsequent release on bail from custody,” the agency said in a statement. “This case highlights the potential dangers of policies that prohibit cooperation with ICE.”

The court told the Patriot Ledger that there was no record of an immigration detainer at the time of his arraignment.

A ruling last year made Massachusetts a sanctuary state – meaning illegal immigrants accused of a crime cannot be transferred to immigration officials.

Murray claims on April 8 she was trying to get home when Amfo allegedly locked the doors to his vehicle and sexually assaulted her in the...

Former FBI director will be called to account for claim there was no 'coordination' between him and then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch to exonerate Hillary

There is a “growing body of evidence” indicating that former FBI Director James Comey lied under oath about his investigation into 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) said Thursday night on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends.”

Comey (above, center) led the FBI’s investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server for official business while serving as secretary of state. Comey testified under oath in July 2016 that he “did not coordinate” with then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch (above, right) or “anyone” regarding his July 2016 statement exonerating Clinton.

Meadows (above, left), a member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said the evidence suggests otherwise.

“We know because we have a number of documents, a growing body of evidence, Brian, that now would suggest that Director Comey … under sworn testimony, a number of times, has said there was no coordination between Loretta Lynch’s DOJ and — and [the] FBI investigation,” Meadows told Fox News co-host Brian Kilmeade.

“Not only was that false, but we know that over and over again now, we have emails that would suggest that....

The Justice Department’s internal watchdog has asked for a criminal probe of the FBI’s recently ousted top deputy for leaking and lying to investigators, several media outlets report.

Michael Horowitz, inspector general at the Justice Department and an appointee of President Barack Obama, sent a criminal referral on Andrew McCabe to prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, according to news reports Thursday.

On March 16, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, acting on the recommendation of the Office of Professional Responsibility—which cited the inspector general’s findings—fired McCabe just hours before his formal retirement with eligibility for a full pension.

An earlier inspector general’s report on McCabe made a “compelling case” that he had repeatedly lied to investigators, Ron Hosko, a former assistant director of the FBI, told The Daily Signal.

However, Hosko asserted, such cases rarely rise to the level of prosecution. Lying under oath is a felony, but it is often “selectively prosecuted,” he said.

The Justice Department, reached late Thursday, declined to comment to The Daily Signal.

McCabe, 50, joined the FBI in 1996. He had been the FBI’s deputy director since Jan. 29, 2016. Amid controversies, he either stepped down or was removed from his post to go on paid leave this past Jan. 29.

Judicial Watch, a conservative government watchdog group, first exposed in 2016 potential conflicts of interest for McCabe through documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act.

“The wheels of justice finally caught up with McCabe for repeatedly lying under oath to...

We’ve discussed the rumors before. Eric Holder, the former attorney general and ethically challenged Fast & Furious centerpiece, wants to be President. At one point, there was some buzz about his placement on the Supreme Court bench, but the Democrats thought it was a good idea to run Hillary in 2016. We all know how that ended up. Since Holder is probably not headed for the SCOTUS, he’s got his eye on the White House.

Yesterday, he confirmed that he’s at least thinking about making a run.

There are two ways you can react to this. The first is to freak out and run around the room screaming “Oh my God, oh my God, ‘President Eric Holder’ would be a complete nightmare.” While you’re right to think that, you should really just relax. The second, and more appropriate, way to react is to chuckle.

Eric Holder doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in Hades of winning …anything. If you thought Hillary was a divisive and widely despised candidate who brought a lot of baggage to the campaign trail, just wait until candidate Eric Holder takes the stage. This is a guy who actually said he wants to brainwash people into accepting gun control. He’s been held in contempt of Congress, was instrumental in a program that poured illegal weapons into...

Establishment DC types who reflexively defend Mueller haven't explained how they came to trust him so completely. It's a question worth asking given the bumpy historical record of Mueller's tenure as FBI director.

Journalist Mike Allen of Axios recently said that one word described Special Counsel Robert Mueller, and that word was “unafraid.”

The context for his remarks on Fox News’ “Special Report” was that Mueller had just spun off to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York a bit of his limitless investigation into President Donald J. Trump. Allen’s comment was like so many others from media and pundit types since the special counsel was launched. If there’s one word to describe the media’s relationship to Mueller, it’s “unquestioning.”

Pundits and politicians have said, repeatedly, that he is “somebody we all trust” with “impeccable credentials.” No matter what his office does, from hiring Democratic donors to run the Trump probe to aggressively prosecuting process crimes, he is defended by most media voices. Criticism of Mueller by people who aren’t part of the Trump Resistance is strongly fought, with claims that disapproval of anything related to Mueller and how he runs his investigation undermine the rule of law.

The media and establishment DC who reflexively defend Mueller haven’t explained how they came to trust him so completely. It’s a question worth asking given the bumpy historical record of Mueller’s tenure as FBI director from 2001 to 2013.

For instance, as I noted to Allen, Mueller was also “unafraid” at completely botching the anthrax killer case, wasting more than $100 million in taxpayer dollars, destroying the lives of multiple suspects, and chasing bad leads using bad methods. Let’s look at that and other cases involving how Mueller and those he placed in positions of power used their authorities and decided what charges to pursue.

The Anthrax Bungling

Shortly after the terrorist attacks in 2001, letters containing anthrax were mailed to media outlets and the offices of Sens. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., and Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., killing five people and infecting 17 others. The FBI quickly focused on an innocent man named Steven Hatfill, relentlessly pursuing him for years while the real killer walked free. As Carl Cannon wrote about the botched case, ridiculous and aggressive methods were used to...

The March for Our Lives rally in Washington, D.C. received wall to wall coverage. But afterward, the high school activists and the gun control fervor seemed to die down. It’s been a while since David Hogg, Cameron Kasky, and Emma Gonzalez have appeared for a TV interview in primetime. Though their voices haven’t been too loud as of late, the young activists are still working to advance their agenda.

According to the Associated Press, David Hogg and his sister, Lauren, just signed a book deal, which in all likelihood will find itself on the best-sellers list.

Two students who survived the deadly mass shooting this year at a Florida high school have a book deal.Siblings David and Lauren Hogg are working on #NEVERAGAIN: A New Generation Draws the Line. Random House announced Wednesday that the book would come out June 5 and that the Hoggs were donating their proceeds to charity and community organizations.The Hoggs and other students at the Parkland, Florida, school have become leading gun control advocates since the Feb. 14 tragedy that left 17 people dead.Random House is calling the book “a moving portrait” of a new political movement. The publisher will make a donation to Everytown for Gun Safety, a nonprofit organization founded in 2014.

I don’t know about you, but I, for one, will not be buying the book.

While the charity and community organizations are not named, it makes me wonder if the organizations are ones that will further the leftist gun control narrative. Random House’s donation will be purely political, as Everytown for Gun Safety’s mission is to promote gun control legislation.

Random House is calling the book a “‘moving portrait’ of a new political movement,” but that is inaccurate. As Tom wrote before, this gun control movement is nothing new,despite what progressives and gun control advocates want to say about it. The tactics are the same. The talking points are the same. The only difference is the political left has...